[8mmMauser]

I am standing in for T’wit, R.I.P on this issue. I won’t be arguing details as T’wit would have and will not answer anecdotal details by those of more precise vocabulary, but will regard such topics as truly ancillary, diversionary.

From the day Wampus SC brought the Texas Futile Care Law into the daylight with his first defense of Andrea Clark, we have seen a truth shine through, not yet to be refuted.

The Texas Futile Care Law was designed, we suppose, to serve the practical purpose of withdrawing useless, needless, or futile care from a patient when it no longer served any purpose. This ideal sounds so decent, it is hard to refute.

But.... the interpretation shifted. What we see is that authorities have shifted definitions. It is now interpreted not the care that is futile, but is the LIFE of the patient which is futile.

That is the core of my concern, that beneath all other brilliant explanations geared to distort the true aim of Pro-Lifers, the result is of this life cheapened in furtherance of the goals of the euthanasiasts. Hence, the resistance we see in Texas to reasoned change.

8mm

[floriduh voter]

And in Texas, if a hospital kicks the patient out, they have TEN days to find another hospital who will care for them humanely or it will be a death sentence. I wonder if the patient tries to cross state lines? Is that even possible?

I would think twice before living in a futile care state. It sounds like once they've got you, you are the property of the state of Texas.